I think that every Nas that can give multilink PPP is bind to Port-Limit.
As for the Livingston(pm2-3) its does not care about Simultaneous Use at all, and
just count the port.

I wonder if livingston radius do it by SNMP or just remember the session in the

Hugh Irvine wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, David Lloyd wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Arturo Pina wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > Just to shed some light if I can...
> > > Michael is meaning that it's not the same to have a single user using
> > > 2 channels than two  separate users using a channel each one. This
> > > way he would lose a customer for the price of a 128k dialup access
> > > might or might not be twice the price of a single access...
> > > If I recall every major NAS can handle this situation (known as
> > > Multilink PPP) and I always thought that Radiator did... I should go
> > > back over to read the Radius RFC but the Port-Limit attribute is
> > > thought exactly for this situation...
> >
> > I agree fully, we are facing the same thing here.  We would like to have a
> > global session limit of 1, and set each user's port-limit to the maximum
> > number of channels they are alloted, becuase (for us) 128k ISDN (or 112k
> > multilink analog) is cheaper than two 64k (or 56k) dialups. We have a
> > one-login-per-computer policy, where a customer is not allowed to log in
> > from more than one machine at a time.
> >
> > I am of the opinion that Radiator should if possible recognize a multilink
> > connection as just one session!
> AAHHHHH!!!! Now I see what you are meaning - I'm not usually so thick.  :~)
> I also see that it is going to get somewhat interesting, because this sort of
> behaviour will of course depend almost entirely on the NAS in question. If the
> NAS can indicate in the Radius Access-Request that the second channel request
> is in fact just that (multilink PPP) then we will be able to do something
> special. (Or indeed if the NAS is configured to accept additional channels
> depending on a returned Port-Limit - although accounting could get messy.)
> However, if the Access-Request from the NAS looks exactly like any other
> Access-Request, then we will have no way to determine whether the request is
> for the second channel of a multilink session, or for a completely different
> session using the same username and password. In which case a Simultaneous-Use
> for that user will be the only way to deal with it.
> If someone would like to do some testing, I'd be happy to assist.
> thanks to everyone who has commented
> Hugh
> --
> Radiator: the most portable, flexible and configurable RADIUS server
> anywhere. SQL, proxy, DBM, files, LDAP, NIS+, password, NT, Emerald,
> Platypus, Freeside, TACACS+, PAM, external, etc etc on Unix, Win95/8,
> NT, Rhapsody

Canaan Surfing Ltd.
Internet Service Providers
Ben-Nes Michael - Manager
Tel: 972-6-6925757
Fax: 972-6-6925858

Archive at http://www.thesite.com.au/~radiator/
To unsubscribe, email '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with
'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.

Reply via email to